Letter from Wales: New evidence of how the Welsh media has effectively been nationalised

by Julian Ruck

Now, you readers of Uncut may be thinking that in Wales things cannot get any crazier. Well, please note the following –

Rob Gittins, who lives in Carmarthenshire and is an award-winning screenwriter for such programmes as EastEnders, Casualty and The Bill, has had the publication of his two books, ‘Gimme Shelter’ and ‘The Poet and the Private Eye’ subsidised by public funds – make no mistake, the gentleman’s creative dexterity has certainly made a casualty out of the taxpayer!

But this is not all, do read on.

Martin Shipton, chief hack for the Western Mail no less, has written a political masterpiece on Welsh politics, titled “A Poor Man’s Parliament” (Seren 2011).

An admirable endeavour by anyone’s standards, except for one thing.

Mr Shipton observes, “…..a  stifling of public debate in Wales through the reliance on Assembly patronage of so many organisations.” So the book’s blurb maintains anyway.

Well, guess what?

His very own Marquandian and towering political critique was published with the financial help of  “Assembly patronage”!

And what did this giant of Welsh journalism, recipient of taxpayer generosity have to say about all this?

“I do not respond to enquiries from “citizen journalists”, particularly those with such an execrable reputation for accuracy as yourself.

You may quote me in full.

Thanks,

Martin”

Readers will note, no denial, nor was there a response to my question as to whether or not he had received any royalties (courtesy of the public purse of course) from his taxpayer junky Welsh publisher, Seren.

Lovely insult is all very well, but as a humble ‘citizen journalist’ I do somehow seem to have access to political press conferences, I do interview leading Welsh politicians and God forbid I actually write for both the Welsh and national press now and again, oh and not to mention my contributions to both Welsh and national broadcasting  – and to cap it all, I’ve even been known to write for the Western Mail, lucky chap that I am!

As for my reputation for inaccurate reporting, to date there has not been one serious or credible challenge to the facts I have reported both here on Uncut and elsewhere. Gwyneth Lewis, ex- Poet Laureate of Wales made an unwise and libelous personal attack on me in the Guardian a while back, wherein said newspaper had to correct and withdraw some of her juvenile nonsense somewhat sharpish, within hours in fact.

Naturally, the lady omitted to mention in her Guardian piece that she herself has received two taxpayer hand outs for her poetic musings amounting to £11,000, and a further grant of £75,000 to sail around the world looking for ports with a Cardiff connection.

Nice work if you can get it.

But here’s another unedifying titbit:

I have been communicating with Mr Shipton for nearly two years re the Welsh arts scandal, and not once has he mentioned his own journey on the Taffia Express gravy train.

And the gentleman has the eviscerating audacity and solipsistic, blustering arrogance to wail with self-righteous and unscrupulous indignation about Welsh Assembly patronage!

A great many people in this country are struggling to make ends meet, so why in God’s name does the Welsh Labour government deem it right and proper for the ‘artistic’ indulgence of the scribbling few (and most of them don’t even do this, they use ghost writers), who are already earning good salaries, to screw the taxpayer for what can only be described as a lazy Sunday afternoon hobby?!

‘Tales of the Welsh Media, don’t end here either.

For some time now, I have been wondering why the national press have been exposing what is going on in Wales re taxpayer funding for Welsh arts etc, but the Welsh media have been remarkably quiet, suspiciously so.

At first I thought it was just BBC Wales, after all so many of their people have been nobbling the taxpayer for both written and unwritten books that their evasion is hardly surprising.

Well, further digging has not only exposed Martin Shipton’s taxpayer funded literary efforts but Jonathan Hill, anchor man at ITV Wales News, has also had his book, “The Pembrokeshire Murders”, paid for by the taxpayer.

Publisher?….yes you’ve got it, Seren.

So,conclusions?

All three main Welsh media platforms BBC Wales, the Western Mail and ITV Wales all have staffers, journalists and presenters riding the Taffia Express taxpayer gravy train.

Welsh journalistic impartiality and courageous investigative reporting?

Welsh institutional cronyism and toxic Crachach  preferment,  make Rupert Murdoch look like a standard bearer for a benevolent and kid glove, journalistic Second Coming!

Readers must be aware by now, of the pitiful state of honest, open debate in Wales. You will have read in my other columns that in Wales no-one is prepared to bite the hand that feeds them.

There is no serious and ruthless scrutiny of the Welsh government, no intellectually refined political commentary. It refuses to respond to FoI  requests, it maintains a tight discipline of silence.

And the one institution that is supposed to hold the Welsh government to account, is nothing but a weak, passive, kow-towing disgrace to any society that values free speech and open, democratic government.

The Welsh media are all in the pocket of Druid Carwyn’s Assembly patronage, it is no wonder then, that to date none of them are reporting the recent matters I have put into the public domain, albeit that they are of considerable public interest.

Things cannot get any crazier in Wales?

You decide and don’t forget, to add insult to injury remember you the taxpayers will be paying the fees and expenses for the artists, writers and performers who are doing their thing at the Dinewfr Festival in West Wales this weekend.

Oddly enough, I haven’t received an invitation to give some authorial pearls of wisdom at this Welsh artistic extravaganza!

Julian Ruck is a novelist, broadcaster and columnist. His most recent novel is ‘The Silver Songsters’ (pub. April 2014).  


Tags: , , , , ,


90 Responses to “Letter from Wales: New evidence of how the Welsh media has effectively been nationalised”

  1. KENNETH says:

    Julian,

    KENNETH here again. You still haven’t answered my questions:

    1) Do you accept that Dinefwr Press, who you pay to produce your books, is a printing press and not a publisher?

    You need to answer this question (an easy one) otherwise nothing you say can be trusted.

    2) Do you accept that you have in the past submitted your work to both Parthian Books and Seren Books only for it to be rejected?

    3) Do you still maintain that Literature Wales requested a copy of your book to consider for the Welsh Book of the Year?

    They have confirmed that they have never done this, but you need to either officially agree or disagree otherwise it is clear that you are lying.

    Anything other than straight answers to these questions will condem you as a liar and a chancer. As MEERKAT says: ‘Simplesh’

    Awaiting,

    KENNETH

  2. Crazy horse says:

    you write for National Press? Really? Who? I can’t imagine this stuff standing up to the scrutiny of a proper publication….

  3. stevemosby says:

    Julian –

    “I do not respond to enquiries from “citizen journalists”, particularly those with such an execrable reputation for accuracy as yourself.”

    Well, you must have been excited to learn that he’s heard of you.

    “As for my reputation for inaccurate reporting, to date there has not been one serious or credible challenge to the facts I have reported both here on Uncut and elsewhere.”

    I think the problem you’re having there is that your definitions of “serious” and “credible” differ wildly from almost everyone else’s. Your facts and conclusions have been repeatedly challenged, but since your response is generally to stick your fingers in your ears, insult anyone who engages with you negatively or simply dismiss your critics as though they were troublemakers being turned away from a local Spar, it is hardly surprising you fail to see it that way.

    This could theoretically be like shooting fish in a barrel, but here’s an example. The existence of Mr Oakley and the validity of his supposed testimony to you was questioned here. Questions which, as per usual, you completely failed to answer: http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/07/08/letter-from-wales-welsh-government-blows-e130m-investment-in-north-wales/

  4. Louise Walsh says:

    Usually, I leave comments to the regulars, but a number of points occur to me after reading Julian Ruck’s latest splenetic column.

    1. Writing is not generally a quick way to make money. The amount of time, energy and money invested in producing a book is rarely repaid. My first novel was published by Seren in 2008. It made little money, but the pleasure of being properly published has kept me writing since. I’ve also retrained as a literacy teacher. I have another novel on the way, about journalism. An enormous amount of time and research has already gone into the book. I doubt, even if this novel gets published, I will see much money. I write because I love it! Talking of journalism…

    2. Ruck alleges that journalists are cashing in a “gravy train” by writing books. The fact that journalists write books is hardly a matter for surprise, since their day job also involves writing.

    3. The whole of Ruck’s argument is built on a castle of sand. He implies that the Welsh Government is directly funding and “buying off” journalists to stop them being critical. This is nonsense. What flimsy truth there is in Ruck’s assertion that journalists’ books are funded by the Welsh Government stems from the fact that the Welsh Government funds the Welsh Books Council, which in turn funds a number of small Welsh publishing houses in Wales. Thus the process is at arm’s length twice over and appears, to me at least, to be defamatory.

    4. It is outrageous to allege that journalists in Wales pull their punches and fail to criticise the Welsh Government out of dishonourable motives. Welsh newspapers are critical of the Welsh Government’s performance very regularly.

    5. Ruck claims in his column that there has “not been one serious or credible challenge to the facts I have reported”. How about this from the Welsh Arts Council of Wales in response to an attack by Ruck:

    “Mr Ruck’s blog, which is sadly both inaccurate and uninformed, is no substitute for proper journalism. Venice during Biennale preview week is certainly not cheap but the location of the event dictates where we must be. We have been clear about the cost with Mr Ruck. That he quotes selectively from the figures and confuses Euros with Pounds suggests either poor attention to detail or a lack of real interest in the facts”.

    6. Lastly, Ruck complains about the state “handouts” given to Welsh publishers like Seren and Parthian yet fails to mention that he has himself submitted novels for publication to these companies. They turned him down, which is presumably why he self-publishes. As I said in point 1, I am going to submit my current novel once it is complete. If Seren and Parthian turn it down, I will look to my own writing for the explanation, rather than some far-fetched Welsh Government conspiracy theory.

    Very best
    Lou

  5. “As for my reputation for inaccurate reporting, to date there has not been one serious or credible challenge to the facts I have reported both here on Uncut and elsewhere. ”

    What???? How about this piece of nonsense claiming “Welsh government blows €130m investment in north Wales” for starters?

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/07/08/letter-from-wales-welsh-government-blows-e130m-investment-in-north-wales/

    Complete, unsubstantiated poppycock. Just like most of his rants here. It would be useful if Ruck could inform us whether he is still a ‘member’ of my old trade union, the National Union of Journalists, as he claimed to be some time back, not that I believe for one moment he’s entitled to hold an NUJ card. For the record here is the NUJ’s code of conduct to which members strive to adhere.

    A journalist:

    At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed.

    Strives to ensure that information disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair.

    Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies.

    Differentiates between fact and opinion.

    Obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means.

    Does nothing to intrude into anybody’s private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest.

    Protects the identity of sources who supply information in confidence and material gathered in the course of her/his work.

    Resists threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information and takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of her/his duties before the information is public knowledge.

    Produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person’s age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation.

    Does not by way of statement, voice or appearance endorse by advertisement any commercial product or service save for the promotion of her/his own work or of the medium by which she/he is employed.

    A journalist shall normally seek the consent of an appropriate adult when interviewing or photographing a child for a story about her/his welfare.

    Avoids plagiarism.

  6. dave says:

    Well, looks like Shippo’s got the measure of you, you serial liar, plagiarist and unpleasant threat-maker.
    Why not admit you yourself submitted to Welsh publishers Julian? That you asked for money for your ‘festival’, and that Dinefwr Press, whom you pay to publish your ‘novels’ , are recipients of public funding (I have checked with them…)

  7. alan says:

    In what way is this ‘evidence’ of anything? This website is ludicrous for publishing this tripe. Ruck -a documented liar and plagiArist – is told by a prize winning journlaist (who won a prize for reporting the Cleveland abuse case) that he’s a rotten blowhard. Fair enough. Julian – have you edited Martin Shipton s reply? I mean is that what he wrote or have you cut anything? Honest answer please.

  8. alan says:

    Another thing julian – please publish your email to Shipton plus your answer to his reply. I believe you are fiddling the correspondence. Also I want to know which of your books was turned down by seren whom you attack in this article. Silver songsters? They turned you down three years ago I believe. You then boasted you had a big London publisher. Now you self publish with a grant aided printer in Carmarthen. What’s the give? Are you malicious or just a bitter failure?

  9. Louise Walsh says:

    Usually I leave comments to the regulars, but a number of points occur to me after reading Julian Ruck’s latest splenetic column.

    1. Writing is not generally a quick way to make money. The amount of time, energy and money invested in producing a book is rarely repaid. My first novel was published by Seren in 2008. It made little money, but the pleasure of being properly published has kept me writing since. I’ve also retrained as a literacy teacher. I have another novel on the way, about journalism. I have already committed an enormous amount of time and research to the book. I doubt, even if this novel gets published, it will be the equivalent of a windfall and it’s the last thing I think about. I write because I love it! I’m sure this is the case with most writers. Talking of journalism…

    2. Ruck alleges that journalists are cashing in on a “gravy train” by writing books. The fact that journalists write books is hardly a matter for surprise, since their day job also involves writing.

    3. The whole of Ruck’s argument is built on a castle of sand. He implies that the Welsh Government is directly funding and “buying off” journalists to stop them being critical. This is nonsense. What flimsy truth there is in Ruck’s assertion that journalists’ books are funded by the Welsh Government stems from the fact that the Welsh Government funds the Welsh Books Council, which in turn funds a number of small Welsh publishing houses in Wales. Thus the process is at arm’s length twice over and appears, to me at least, to be defamatory.

    4. It is outrageous to allege that journalists in Wales pull their punches and fail to criticise the Welsh Government out of dishonourable motives. Welsh newspapers are critical of the Welsh Government’s performance very regularly.

    5. Ruck claims in his column that there has “not been one serious or credible challenge to the facts I have reported”. How about this from the Welsh Arts Council of Wales in response to an attack by Ruck:

    “Mr Ruck’s blog, which is sadly both inaccurate and uninformed, is no substitute for proper journalism. Venice during Biennale preview week is certainly not cheap but the location of the event dictates where we must be. We have been clear about the cost with Mr Ruck. That he quotes selectively from the figures and confuses Euros with Pounds suggests either poor attention to detail or a lack of real interest in the facts”.

    6. Lastly, Ruck complains about the state “handouts” given to Welsh publishers like Seren and Parthian yet fails to mention that he has himself submitted novels for publication to these companies. They turned him down, which is presumably why he self-publishes. As I said in point 1, I am going to submit my current novel once it is complete. If Seren and Parthian turn it down, I will look to my own writing for the explanation, rather than some far-fetched Welsh Government conspiracy theory.

    Very best
    Lou

  10. “…nor was there a response to my question as to whether or not he had received any royalties (courtesy of the public purse of course) from his taxpayer junky Welsh publisher, Seren…”

    Surely royalties are only paid once the initial advance has been earned, and are based purely on sales of the books – that has certainly been my experience in more than half a century of being published. Forgive my obtuseness, but I don’t see how they are “courtesy of the public purse”.

  11. dave says:

    Dear Mr Ruck,
    What is this ‘evidence’ of? All I see is a senior journalist who has covered everything from the miners’ strike to the Cleveland child abuse case (he used to work, indeed for the Guardian as their north of England correspondent), refusing to engage with a vanity-published liar and plagiarist called Julian Ruck.
    As you know, Seren are not obliged to answer your questions.
    I know this because I wrote to them asking for details of their rejection of you, and of the correspondence you sent them before and after. They told me they would not do so as it breached your confidentiality.
    Lucky for you, they seem to be protecting you from serious embarrassment, and from being discovered to have lied – here and elsewhere – about never having submitted your ‘writing’ to them.
    One last question: have you threatened them if they go public with your correspondence?
    Julian Ruck desperately wanted to be published in Wales by a proper publisher. But his books are unreadable, barely-literate and plotted like a not very bright child’s fantasy.
    He now has his books printed by a printer.
    He claims people are afraid to engage with him, yet the comments on these blog posts are full of questions he runs away from.

  12. To Steve Mosby,

    I tell you what, being as you are such a keen disciple of every word I write, why don’t you itemise here on Uncut, each and very piece of data, fact or financial amount etc that you in your expert opinion believe to be fantasy?

    I will duly respond, but note I will not engage with pathetic, Alinskyite and trollish desperation.

    As for your reference to Mr Oakley, all correspondence as published on Uncut was sent to Edwina Hart’s (Business minister) press office. The lady refused to respond, I can’t imagine why?

    You will note that no-one from the Welsh government came out to deny Mr Oakley’s complaints, albeit that they were given ample opportunity to do so. Indeed, I personally brought these matters up with a couple of Welsh politicians.

    Further, it is hardly unusual for a source to keep their tel.nos. and addresses confidential, although such information was given to Uncut and one of the nationals.

    I am obliged to point out that if you think the editor’s of Uncut would for one moment publish anything that could be considered even remotely libellous or for that matter unverifiable, then you are gravely mistaken.

    It is a serious and respected political platform, as you well know.

    Every word I write has to be fully sourced and able to stand up to scrutiny.

    Thus to date, neither my good self nor Uncut has received one credible and valid complaint from any individual referred to in my columns or indeed in respect of data published.

    Finally, you will observe that having now written some 50+ pieces for Uncut (not short of 50,000 words), not once, I repeat not once, have the editors had to publish an apology or correction for or to the data etc reported in said pieces.

    Now, put up or shut up.

    Julian Ruck

  13. Ramsey

    The same thought had occurred to me. If an author is receiving royalties it can only be because an advance has earned out. So any royalties can only come from sales — not the ‘public purse’. Even if the initial advance came from the public purse the fact it’s been earned out would mean the publisher would be very happy indeed since he or she would have a book that was selling.

    Once more Julian Ruck demonstrates he has absolutely no understanding of how publishing actually works. And much else besides of course.

    If this rubbish was published in the press, instead of a blog that does as it pleases, Ruck’s ramblings would be covered by the Press Council and he would long ago have been censored for his countless inventions and distortions. Martin Shipton is to be applauded for telling him where to get off. One can only hope the press officers who are still allowing him into media events — why? He’s not a journalist — take the same attitude in future.

  14. How wonderful, Mr Hewson!

    You’re back from your stay at the Troll Rehabilitation Centre, although sadly it seems you have suffered a relapse.

    Never mind, one step at a time eh?

    My NUJ number is:002304 – do feel free to check.

    If I may re-quote your NUJ Code of Conduct :

    A journalist, ‘Protects the identity of sources who supply information and material gathered in the course of his/her work.’

    Is this not precisely what I have done in respect of Mr Oakley, where the 130M investment fiasco is concerned?

    Now, do go away and have a nice cup of tea or something.

    JR

  15. dave says:

    Julian, you have been deluged, here and elsewhere, with corrections, challenges, points of order and spelling and grammatical corrections (notably your use of the grocer’s apostrophe).
    You are a blustering coward.
    Please answer this question: does your rejection by Seren and Parthian have anything to do with your antagonism towards them. Yes or No will do.

  16. To Louise Walsh,

    Try that little lot in the Court of Public Opinion.

    You will be annihilated and you know it.

    And you Welsh literati trolls never fail to disappoint.

    Still trying the ‘self-published’ angle, I note.

    Firstly, I do not pay Dinefwr one penny – fact. You put some verifiable evidence up on Uncut to prove otherwise.

    Secondly, even if I was self-published so what? The very words have become anachronistic and need I point out that in any given week, there are about 20 self-published titles in Amazon’s top 100 sellers.

    Further, it is a pity that you junkies on the taxpayer Welsh literati gravy train didn’t do some self-publishing yourselves.

    Save the hard pressed taxpayer some money for once. Your books don’t sell even with the taxpayer paying for them, so who knows?

    And as for Seren and Parthian……oh please, is this old swansong all you have got??

    JR

    PS As for the Arts Council of Wales and their self-serving bluster, they will shortly have the opportunity to try it on again with the Wales Audit Office, and a possible Public Accounts Committee inquiry.

  17. To Louis Walsh,

    As you are such a fervent supporter of taxpayer funding for Welsh writers and journalists, albeit that you are totally ignoring the fact that BBC Wales is supposed to be ‘impartial’.

    Allow me to put this to you:

    Last year, Brian Meechan, journalist with BBC Wales, interviewed me for Sunday Politics re the Welsh literati. He omitted to mention that he himself has been a recipient of £4000 from Literature Wales for a book he hasn’t even written – you know the sort of thing, here’s £4000 from the taxpayer for you to stay at home and ‘think’ – thus the pre-recording of the interview and my being kept away from a live debate in the studio.

    BBC Wales knew I had the goods on them and weren’t about to allow me to let rip, which I assure you I would have done, as I made clear to Betsan Powys.

    Impartiality??? Don’t make me laugh!

    You refer to the ACW’s response to the Biennale farce.

    Never mind my personal blog, you have conveniently omitted to mention (bit of Gwyneth Lewis re-visited here I’m thinking) that the Western Mail reported( http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/arts-council-wales-spends-11000-4887928) this scandal, chapter and verse. Admittedly they got the story from me, but no doubt Martin Shipton checked the facts before running the story.

    Now M/s Walsh, being as you are so certain of your ground, a Cardiff radio station is prepared to mediate a debate re Taxpayer funding and the Welsh literati. They have asked me to find someone who will present an opposing view to my own.

    How about it?

    It will certainly make some lively radio and the publicity won’t do you any harm.

    Julian Ruck

    PS And just for the record, if it makes you feel any better notwithstanding that I have stated this so many times now that it is becoming tedious: I SELF-PUBLISHED MY FIRST TWO NOVELS – they did do rather well, about 4,500 copies in Wales alone and this is just in print.

  18. stevemosby says:

    Julian –

    — “I tell you what, being as you are such a keen disciple of every word I write, why don’t you itemise here on Uncut, each and very piece of data, fact or financial amount etc that you in your expert opinion believe to be fantasy?”

    Thanks, but no. For now, let’s stick to talking about the article you wrote concerning Jeremy Oakley. Let’s try to get to the bottom of what happened.

    — “You will note that no-one from the Welsh government came out to deny Mr Oakley’s complaints, albeit that they were given ample opportunity to do so. Indeed, I personally brought these matters up with a couple of Welsh politicians.”

    Why would they deny anything? The project clearly wasn’t supported. The question is why.

    From what I’ve been able to discover in the public domain, Mr Oakley is presently director of two companies: Oakland Biofuels Ltd, which was founded in January 2014, and Trans European Agricultural Machinery Ltd, which was founded in July 1997. Both companies are registered at the same address, which appears to be a residential property in Surrey. The latter company is non-trading, but also appears to be listed by Companies House as dormant in y/e 31 July 2013, which is the period in which he wrote to you and would be the latter of the two years he claimed to have been developing the €130 million project he discusses. (I don’t have a business background; I don’t know exactly what a company being dormant entails).

    According to the email you quote, he had developed a green energy project specifically designed for Trawsfynydd. It was a €130 million investment (60% local) that would generate 100 jobs, with an annual return to the region of c€20 million. 100% of the investment had been pledged (twice – why twice?), and no subsidy was required from the Welsh government. Instead, he required “moral support to please the funders” (what would this involve?) and for the government “to work with the Snowdonia National Park planners in helping” to regenerate the area and facilitate the development (what would this involve?)

    Lacking the government’s support, Mr Oakley took the project to three other countries. One was prepared to attract the project and support it with financial incentives; the second responded within 24 hours offering incentives and land; the third offered land, a site (differing from land how?) and support. All on the strength of a phone call, apparently, although presumably he must at least have emailed some details through.

    We have no way of knowing the present state of the project. Oakland Biofuels Ltd’s website is a spartan and amateurish affair, hosted on weebly of all things. I can’t locate a website at all for Trans European Agricultural Machinery Ltd.

    Two questions. Is this basically correct? And can you think of any other explanation why the project wasn’t supported aside from government incompetence, as you alleged? Because I can think of a few.

  19. Julan Ruck says:

    To Alan,

    Here we are:

    To martin.shipton@mediawales.co.uk,seren@serenbooks.com

    Jun 19 at 9:30 AM

    Hello Martin,

    Your book, as above, was paid for by the taxpayer.

    Please confirm whether or not you have received royalties?

    My deadline is mid-day today.

    Thanks,

    Julian

    PS A ‘no-response’ will be duly reported.

    The gentleman’s reply is as stated in my piece. Now why don’t you go and check with Mr Shipton?

  20. dave says:

    “And the gentleman has the eviscerating audacity and solipsistic, blustering arrogance to wail with self-righteous and unscrupulous indignation about Welsh Assembly patronage!”

    ‘eviscerating audacity’? Julian , do you know what ‘eviscerating’ means? This is as bad as one of your own ‘novels’.

    Comedy gold, this man, comedy gold.

  21. Tafia says:

    I will duly respond, but note I will not engage with pathetic, Alinskyite and trollish desperation. You mean you will categorically refuse to either outright deny anything or back anything up with hard facts from independent third parties. Strange that.

    As for your reference to Mr Oakley, all correspondence as published on Uncut was sent to Edwina Hart’s (Business minister) press office. The lady refused to respond, I can’t imagine why? I can and so can most organisms with more than two brain cells, Why on earth do you suffer some sort of delusion that a theven a third rate politician would biother their arse responding to you.

    You will note that no-one from the Welsh government came out to deny Mr Oakley’s complaints, albeit that they were given ample opportunity to do so. Indeed, I personally brought these matters up with a couple of Welsh politicians. Again, why on earth would they bother. They’ve got better, far more worthwhile things to do such as scratch their arse.

    Finally, you will observe that having now written some 50+ pieces for Uncut (not short of 50,000 words), not once, I repeat not once, have the editors had to publish an apology or correction for or to the data etc reported in said pieces.

    Finally, you will observe that having now written some 50+ pieces for Uncut (not short of 50,000 words), not once, I repeat not once, have the editors had to publish an apology or correction for or to the data etc reported in said pieces. They never do. Again, you pay scant attention to the site.

    You suffer from a grossly inflated ego. All you are on here is the comic element – something to abuse and take the mickey out of. Nobody takes you seriously and the site itself probably only uses you to increase it’s hits and conjure up a bit of interest and light entertainment. Even within the Welsh tories you are in the wing that is in rapid and terminal decline.

  22. dave says:

    Mr Ruck’s ‘journalism’ – see here for an example:

    http://www.llanellistar.co.uk/women-unhinged-Julian-Ruck-s-latest-thoughts/story-21270159-detail/story.html

    Thanks Labour Uncut for publishing this reactionary claptrap – you’re making tools of yourselves

    Full text of said drivel here:

    NOW and again I gird my loins and tune in to BBC R4’s Woman’s Hour, if only to remind myself that I’m still a man, no matter what the feminists say.

    The presenter Jenni Murray’s voice, with its explosions of treacle coated empathy and self-esteem, never fails to make me want to dive for cover but there we are, that’s part of the fun of listening to Woman’s Hour.

    Frankly the whole hour sounds pretty desperate to me but then being a man, what do I know?

    As the title of the programme suggests, Woman’s Hour is all about women and how they rule the world, which they undoubtedly do which is why I’m constantly wondering what all the fuss is about – come to think of it, I could do a weekly piece about women, couldn’t I just? Four engagements (and not one ring ever thrown back at me even in temper, too damned smart the female of the species!), two marriages, one divorce and like most men I keep going back for more if only to try to find out where I went wrong in the first place — women always being right about these things, as we all well know.

    Anyway, in my twilight years as it were, actually make that mature years, I aint’t an old ’un yet, I have learnt to adopt one fundamental premise — all women are unhinged.

    Lovely, capable, strong and virtuous they may be but still basically unhinged, so we men really have nothing to worry about.

    Which brings me to my two canine beauties. They never answer back, always do as they are told, easy to feed and water, and sure as hell don’t need £60 every couple of weeks for a haircut — no wonder the missus is always yelling: “You love those two dogs more than me!” Bet there’s s few men out there who have heard this one before.

    Even so, what with Woman’s Hour and £6o haircuts, not to mention of course the who’s the boss around here syndrome, we men just can’t help loving ’em.

    So, women are all unhinged?

  23. dave says:

    Does this mean, Julian, that you will finally admit you submitted your books to the publishers you now attack, and that you don’t understand (as a vanity-published ‘author’), the difference between an advance and royalty – royalties are what you get when the advance has ‘earned out’, in other words, when the publisher, whether grant-aided or not, has made back what they paid in the first place?

  24. Mr Akira Origami says:

    As an “unequivocal supporter of Welsh devolution”, will Martin Shipman’s next instalment be “Poor man’s Education and Health Service?”

  25. alan says:

    Julian that’s just one email. Id like to see the correspondence ie your email , his reply your reply and so on until we can see the thread. Is your beef with Shipton anything to do with his reports on yiur self reviews on amazon and his discovery that your paid publicist has been leaving so called impartial reviews of your novel on the Welsh books council website?

  26. Are you trolls ever going to stick to topic?

    Your puny, albeit amusing, little attempts to smear and discredit me have got you well and truly nowhere.

    Get over it and get a life.

    All of you.

    Now, good luck and cheerio. I have some lectures to prepare.

    JR

  27. PS To Steve Mosby,

    Oh and your ‘Thanks, but no.’

    Priceless!

    Make that a flea, not a tadpole. This creature is even smaller.

    JR

  28. “A journalist, ‘Protects the identity of sources who supply information and material gathered in the course of his/her work.’ Is this not precisely what I have done in respect of Mr Oakley, where the 130M investment fiasco is concerned?”

    No you didn’t protect the identity of your source. You identified him as Mr Oakley and printed large parts of his letter without even questioning its accuracy!

    You also claimed that his plan would not go to other European countries instead of Wales. Well.. that was a year ago. So how about you use your ‘journalistic’ skills and give us an update? Tell us where Mr Oakley is now building his £130 million venture instead of Wales. I see no news of it anywhere — least of all on Mr Oakley’s website, which is hosted on a free hosting service and doesn’t even include a company address. If your ‘exclusive’ was true something must surely be happening now. So… do tell us what it is!

    Two other Ruck claims you might want to substantiate. First that your infamous Kidwelly festival will ‘rise from the ashes’. If so you might want to look at your http://www.kidwellyefestival.com/ website which now appears to be occupied by a lovesick Japanese gentlemen. And I’m sure I speak for Steve too when I say that we are still awaiting, with unbated breath, your promise to expose us as pawns of the Welsh arts establishment, pursuing you because they gave us backhanders. Totally untrue of course but that’s never stopped you in the past, has it?

    Your behaviour follows a very predictable pattern.

    1. Write a story and get the facts wrong.

    2. Shriek hysterically at anyone who has the temerity to point out you’ve no idea what you’re writing about (in such a hissyfit way I can only assume you’re copying the technique from here – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvs4bOMv5Xw&feature=kp )

    3. Deny everything then go back to stage one all over again.

    I do hope the NUJ will ask itself how on earth you claim to qualify for a professional union, especially one for a profession you publicly despise. I do wonder too… are you and Kenneth Williams by any chance related? Because your impersonation of him is about the best thing you do to be honest.

    As for the whole Seren and Parthian question… since you declare yourself to be a ‘Freedom of Information campaigner’ you surely have a simple solution to clear this up once and for all. Publish your correspondence with these publishers and tell them they’re free to publish their correspondence with you.

    You are a great supporter of the public’s right to know after all. Why would you refuse?

  29. Louise Walsh says:

    Julian,

    I don’t profess to be an expert. I’m merely putting forward my opinion and cannot speak for those such as Gwyneth Lewis or Brian Meechan who have had payouts. I don’t know the reasons behind these awards. These are financial decisions I have nothing to do with, as I’m sure you’re aware. I’m making the point that writing is not all about money and, further, the sums of money that you are imagining going to those published are exaggerated.

    Worldwide, there is a legacy of supporting the arts. What is wrong with that? And the money from the Welsh Government isn’t just doled out to the lucky few, as you allege. It is also spent on encouraging literacy in Wales.

    Literature Wales have ongoing projects (regularly supported by publishers such as Seren and Parthian) throughout Wales encouraging literacy. Isn’t this something you are passionate about yourself? For example, after the publication of my novel, Literature Wales gave me the opportunity of encouraging young amateur boxers in journal writing. This experience was what made me think of retraining as a literacy teacher. You see how Gwyneth was right when she said ‘on an individual level, the creative economy works indirectly’?

    I would be more than happy to go on the radio to talk about writing in Wales, but given that you’ve recently written an article in the Llanelli Star entitled: ‘Are all women unhinged?’ I’m not sure I want to give you the credibility.

    Very best
    Lou

    PS: The point Dave Hewson and Ramsay Campbell make about royalties occurred to me also. Royalties are from book sales.

    PPS: I have also self-published. I certainly don’t make any judgements on such an endeavour. It has its advantages and disadvantages.

  30. I suppose the newspaper column is Mr Ruck’s attempt to be controversial or humorous if not a bid for both.

  31. stevemosby says:

    “Oh and your ‘Thanks, but no.’

    Priceless!

    Make that a flea, not a tadpole. This creature is even smaller.”

    Yes, I’m aware that fleas are smaller than tadpoles, Julian, thank you. But imagine if they weren’t! It would certainly be easier to spot them, but also utterly horrifying.

    On point, why would I bother trawling through the comment thread beneath pretty much every single one of your articles, looking for instances where your facts – and more importantly your interpretation of the facts – have been criticised and challenged? What would be the point? So you could ignore all of them at once? I’ve just gone into considerable detail about one instance and you haven’t responded. I don’t see why I should waste even more time when you’ve demonstrated that you’re incapable of adult debate and discussion.

    And to repeat Alan’s important point: do you not think you should have acknowledged your personal bias against Mr Shipton? You won’t answer, so I’ll tell you. Yes, you should.

  32. Gillian Brightmore says:

    Re: Mr.Mosby & Mr.Hewson :

    It can only make one wonder if these gentlemen are in fact serious , full – time writers why are they wasting their time pouring vitriol on Julian Ruck, someone they obviously despise?

    Wouldn’t they have better things to do with their time, or is someone making it worth their while to do so continually, and for two years ?

    Food for some thought . . .

  33. Julan Ruck says:

    I confess to being somewhat mystified myself, GB.

    Two years of relentless smear and fantastic insult and still they persist.

    Extremely odd I must say.

    No doubt all will become clear in due course.

    JR

  34. Ruck – you asked above for people to point out the errors in your ‘reporting’ so that you could answer them.

    Steve did that. I did that. Lots of other people too. Not insults. Not smears. Just examples of your countless factual errors and distortions and as usual you fail to answer them, instead resorting to petty childish name-calling..

    So all will not ‘become clear in due course’. At least not from you. Though I doubt anyone’s fooled.

    Enjoy your cruise. My thoughts are with the passengers.

  35. John abell says:

    Gill, are you going to pay back your arts council grant you received to write a collection of short fiction, which you failed to complete?

    The title of this essay must be a joke? Again, it goes beyond parody. Julian, you get called up on ‘facts’ every time you put pen to paper! Are you so delusional that you think any serious Welsh politicians would take you remotely serious? Your last Llanelli Star article is a case in point, when you are not plagiarising you can’t help but write utter drivel. Does anyone reading this outside Wales ( where Julian is seen as a tragicomic farce) actually take this seriously? Effectively nationalised media? What nonsense.

    Because Julian can’t get his novels published by Seren and Parthian, the paranoid buffoon sees conspiracies everywhere. I’m not sure how these bitter and factually inept pieces have anything to do with grassroots labour politics, hopefully someone who sees a link can enlighten me?

    It is writing like this that stops Julian’s dreams of literary greatness in the starting blocks, brace yourselves…

    ‘Suddenly he leapt up from the table and dashed for the dilapidated toilet situated next to the stables. It had to be this toilet; it was reasonably sound proof and hardly ever used by anyone. He reached the toilet door, yanked it open in a thorough state of panic and let loose a surging Niagara of vomit, at the same moment his bowels detonated and nearly lifted him off the ground. For one hour his arse and stomach continued to ambush him. All he could do was sit on the toilet and wail ‘Oh God!… Oh God!… Oh God! over and over again. He wanted to die.’

    Golly.

    Anyhow. Who is ‘Mr Oakley’? Why have no real journalists heard of him, and only a piss poor amateur blogger and McGonagalesque novelist that is Julian? It seems strange to me.

    Jules and Gill, you must have more screws loose than I thought if you genuinely believe that people who disagree with your bitter and ludicrous views are getting layer off by a higher power! Oh dear.

  36. stevemosby says:

    Gillian –

    I can only think of two explanations for your confusion as to why I continue to comment. The first is that you don’t understand that this is an article on the internet that is open to comments. Given you have commented yourself, this seems unlikely. The second is that you feel Julian’s articles are unimportant and unworthy of discussion – which seems harsh to me, although I admit I can see where you’re coming from.

    Julian –

    You keep making these insinuations. Last year, if memory serves, you were performing FOI requests on David and me and threatening to write about us imminently. You never did. Of course, you know full well that there’s nothing to write. I doubt you’re even fooling yourself at this point, but who really knows what goes on inside that head of yours?

  37. Julan Ruck says:

    To Mr Hewson,

    ‘Lots of other people’…..Ummm.

    Five people including you and Mr Mosby and those using multiple identities?

    And not one individual or organisation with any serious credibility.

    I don’t think so.

    Oh and I promise I will do my level best to ensure that passengers enjoy my lectures, albeit that I am a charlatan, a fraud, a plagiarist, a failed writer……..if you’re nice to me I might even give your books a plug!

    Best wishes,

    Julian

  38. PS To Messrs Mosby and Hewson,

    I have been thinking. For two years now, you two gentleman have been particularly vociferous in your condemnation of me as writer, journalist, broadcaster etc etc

    It is time I feel, that we debated your accusations and bold assertions face to face in a public forum, with the media in attendance – easy enough for me to arrange.

    I am more than happy to enter into a two to one debate, particularly in respect of Welsh arts and the taxpayer.

    As stated above, an independent mediator can be appointed.

    You might not like to admit it, but I do have a perfectly respectable media profile albeit that you quite obviously believe me to be a liar, a fraud and a charlatan (see the Media tab on my website).

    I am affording you a polite opportunity to state your case as it were, and I do hope that you will accept.

    Let us put these matters to rest once and for all.

    I will personally refund any expenses you may incur by way of travel to Wales.

    Regards,

    Julian Ruck

  39. I didn’t realise you needed a quorum of people to point out you were a fantasist. Above you simply say, ‘I tell you what, being as you are such a keen disciple of every word I write, why don’t you itemise here on Uncut, each and very piece of data, fact or financial amount etc that you in your expert opinion believe to be fantasy? I will duly respond.’

    And how do you respond when people to do this? By calling anyone asking you to verify your claims ‘fleas and tadpoles’ then complaining they insult you. And, naturally, failing to substantiate your ridiculous stories since they are inventions in the first place.

    I’m deeply impressed your offerings on the cruise aren’t just talks but actual ‘lectures’. Strange, given your fame, that the cruise company isn’t advertising your presence on the voyage. Are you waiting on tables too?

  40. To David Hewson,

    Funnily enough, I’ve done a lot of waiting on tables in my time. I was rather good at it, particularly when it came to firing up the occasional crepe suzette.

    I could also shake a mean cocktail or two into the bargain!

    Oh, and I’ve also been known to give the odd lecture too, of the legal variety granted but even these were not as soporific as ‘creative writing’ invention.

    Finally, I am curious Mr Hewson. How do you know that the commissioning cruise company hasn’t advertised my talks?

    I haven’t named it anywhere!

    Cheerio and keep trying if it brings you happiness.

    JR

  41. John abell says:

    Julian, i have to ask again. Are you delusional?

    You’ve no reputation or credibility to speak of. Respectable media presence? Julian, no.

    You write absolute rubbish for a local paper with no circulation, that doesn’t pay you. Here are some examples.

    http://www.llanellistar.co.uk/women-unhinged-Julian-Ruck-s-latest-thoughts/story-21270159-detail/story.html#

    Your latest drivel, where you claim 50% of the worlds population, and this piece in which you plagiarise Christopher Hitchens…

    http://www.theleftroom.co.uk/?p=1838

    There are also many pieces in newspapers that make you look like a bit of a bellend, like the Three Tenors gaffe
    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/three-welsh-tenors-angry-over-2023779

    The time you got banned from your local Spar for being a tit.

    http://www.llanellistar.co.uk/Author-Julian-Ruck-banned-Spar-store-Kidwelly/story-20413355-detail/story.html

    Getting your, admittedly, very busy publicist to review your writing for you. Which makes a change at least, from Julian ‘bagehot1 Virgil’ Ruck. At least when your publicist reviewed you she didn’t sign it off ‘JR’.

    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/review-controversial-writer-julian-rucks-7025738

    Not to forget your wikipedia page, which you set up Julian, getting deleted because you’re a no mark and ‘gadfly’.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FJulian_Ruck

    Not to mention how bad your novels are, this site being a lengthy literary critique.

    http://jewelsfromjulian.wordpress.com

    And you talk about book publishing, and Welsh publishers in particular. Something you know nothing about. I’d rather be published by Parthian or Seren than your illustrious printers…

    http://www.dinefwrprinters.co.uk

    If I were David Hewson or Steve Mosby, I’d be reticent about appearing publicly with you Julian, as it may be damaging to there good reputations. Yours is terrible.

  42. stevemosby says:

    Julian –

    “I will personally refund any expenses you may incur by way of travel to Wales.”

    Ah, but you don’t know the circuitous route I might take…

    Julian, be serious for a moment. I highly doubt any media would be interested. And I highly doubt, if they did, you would want me asking you questions about plagiarism and fake reviews and threats to sue and time-wasting reports to the police for an hour.

    Questions about arts funding, involving facts and figures, are better addressed in writing, where claims can be set down and scrutinised and words and meanings precisely chosen. If only there existed a forum for such a debate… Oh wait, we’re in one. And since you have repeatedly demonstrated that you are both unwilling and unable to have that debate here, I fail to see why you would or even could be more capable of doing so in the flesh.

    However, if that’s what you want, why not debate with Joao or John? I believe they’ve indicated they’d be more than happy to have a face-to-face debate with you, and they wouldn’t sarcastically book an indulgent and extravagant world trip in order to reach you.

  43. Lizzy Salander says:

    Dear Mr David Hewson.

    Your outspoken comments on Labour Uncut are a big hit in Scandinavia and have a big following.

    There are rumours that you are going to write a novel about Marius but with the end slightly changed. I’ve heard on the grapevine Disney are interested even before you write a word. Good luck with the project.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/copenhagen-zoo-kills-four-lions-despite-outcry-over-death-of-marius-the-giraffe-9215375.html

    PS Nice piece of hacking on the kidwellyefestival website, you seem to have a great British sense of humour.

    PPS Is it true you are going to be the official speech writer for Stephen Kinnock
    when he is elected at the safe Labour seat in Aberavon in 2015?

    Best wishes from all of us at David Hewson fan club Malmo.

    Lizzy

  44. Oh dear, Ruck. You really do need to look up the meaning of the word ‘solipsist’. No one will ‘debate’ with you for so many very good reasons. Firstly you’ve made it clear here time and time again that you feel under no obligation to back up your delusional claims with hard fact.

    If you won’t answer the simple questions already raised in this thread why should anyone travel to listen to you the same disingenuous process of denial in person?

    Furthermore I have no interest in discussing Welsh arts policy with you. I’m not Welsh. People who are find you so tedious and disingenuous they can’t be bothered either.

    What I object to are your futile and increasingly pathetic attempts to pass yourself off as a bona fide journalist and commentator when nothing could be further from the truth.

    Finally, you are a deeply unpleasant bully. Ruck antics I’ve had to deal with in the past include you making an abusive phone call to my agent, several threatening emails, an attempt to disrupt a book event in Wales and the spreading of the stupid lie that Steve and I are somehow paid pawns of the Welsh literary establishment. And a string of puerile personal insults to childishly laughable I can’t even be offended.

    So I’m afraid an invitation to a public debate on the topic ‘Is Julian Ruck A Charlatan?’ is one I have to decline. You answer the question yourself here every time you murder the English language with one of your ‘articles’.

  45. “I tell you what, being as you are such a keen disciple of every word I write, why don’t you itemise here on Uncut, each and very piece of data, fact or financial amount etc that you in your expert opinion believe to be fantasy?

    I will duly respond, but note I will not engage with pathetic, Alinskyite and trollish desperation.”

    Sigh. I’ve done this so many times, and you never ever respond to me, or you just try to insult me. You seem to think that if you stop responding meaningfully and cover your ears then I will not post, but I think it is right to correct you at every turn you make. I understand that due to the car crash nature of these articles, and your belligerent insistence that you always come out on top (which is so contradictory to reality that it is laughable), Labour Uncut get a large volume of traffic to your articles, and I believe it right to expose your dodgy analysis and pestiferous opinions at every juncture.

    So here I will take you up on your kind offer, as you have failed to respond on a large number of occasions. I will only show two examples in which you have failed to respond, but this is a pattern you have established since writing for Labour Uncut.

    From “Letter from Wales: Revealed: Scale of extra spending on pupils in Welsh vs English medium schools”

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2014/01/31/letter-from-wales-revealed-scale-of-extra-spending-on-pupils-in-welsh-medium-schools/comment-page-1/#comments

    “Take Bridgend: Nearly £3000, I repeat £3000, more per pupil is spent in the Welsh medium than the English medium – this no doubt has everything to do with the fact that Bridgend is largely English speaking, and what about Anglesey (a hotbed of Potty Plaid nationalist intent), Gwynedd and Conway?”

    Of the 22 local authorities, it is cheaper to educate in Welsh Medium Education in 10 of them. English is cheaper in the other 12, although the difference in Pembrokeshire is £1 per pupil, which is neglible (especially when you consider that the dearth of WM schools there means that transport costs per pupil will be much higher.) In a number of these areas there are far fewer WM schools than English Medium schools, so the overall cost will be less to the Local Education Authority.

    So how come WM education is more expensive in the other regions? One reason which you fail to mention is how Welsh schools are set up. Take Ysgol Bro Edern, which opened in September 2012 in North Cardiff. Ysgol Bro Edern was meant to open on the site of St Teilo’s High School in order to meet the demand for WM education in the city. However, to bring the old building up to date, pupils at Bro Edern had to share facilities with Ysgol Glantaf for that first year, while being taught in temporary accommodation (that is, portakabins) on Glantaf’s school playing fields. Pupils were bussed in while their school was being built.

    The pattern is repeated everywhere, as demand continues for WM education. Where WM education needs to be met, WM schools typically take over older EM schools where pupil numbers are falling (LEAs tend to merge schools with surplus places). Generally speaking, improvements need to be made for these new WM schools to meet the prospected number of pupils, which within a short time will be more than the previous EM school it replaced. Can you not see why the spending ‘per pupil’ would be higher?

    What is more amazing than your crude analysis is the differences in how much is spent per LEA. In Anglesey, for instance, £3005 is spent per pupil in English Medium Education; in Neath Port Talbot it is £4127, a difference of £1222 per pupil. Indeed, as Jenny Randerson of the Lib Dems pointed out a few years ago, it is a lottery as to how much money is spent on education in Wales. Instead of attacking WM education it would be far better to statistically analyse the spending per pupil in each LEA and to try and figure out why the spending is so different. Perhaps a national plan of action could be made to try and improve Education in Wales as a whole.

    From “Letter from Wales: This is not the way to show Labour will only spend carefully”

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2014/02/07/letter-from-wales-this-is-not-the-way-to-show-labour-will-only-spend-carefully/

    “I would ask readers to note that last month BBC Wales reported that the Welsh government has employed 400 extra civil servants in the last two years while the number employed across the UK fell.”

    That is indeed the case. But you are not giving the full picture here, Julian. Between December 2009 and December 2011, the number of Welsh Government (WG) staff fell by around 1100. The extra 391 staff are largely specialists, brought in as the WG has assumed more responsibilities in the past few years (you may remember the referendum on extending the law-making powers in March 2011). So the net fall of civil servants in Wales over the last four years is at least 709.

    “So much for Carwyn’s restraint on public spending then.”

    The actual running costs of the WG are around 10% lower than they were four years ago, despite the recent increase of civil servants.

    “So, how does Carwyn and his Team Druid justify yet another manic departure from Westminster Labour policy?
    You tell me…”

    The figures I have quoted are all there in the article from which you got this information in the first place. You must have known all this, Julian. You have twisted this round to make a non-story sound credible. You have failed to quote the most important part(s) of the press release – the first three paragraphs detailing how numbers have actually fallen – and you have failed to quote the final paragraph which details how running costs have fallen too, instead choosing to only publish the penultimate paragraph as it fits your bigoted views. Anyone wishing to check my analysis may do so by following this link:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-25849068

    I am aghast that you have been allowed to take a single paragraph like this out of context. Why Labour Uncut didn’t check this themselves is beyond me, as it does their credibility no service at all.

    I have two further points to make. As can be seen in these two examples, you often post data in your blogs on Labour Uncut, but you only post the data that supports your argument. As soon as all data becomes available, your argument is destroyed.

    When it comes to the vast majority of your articles, you write as if everything presented is fact, yet you consistently fail to differentiate between fact and opinion – a misdemeanour which should see your NUJ card revoked.

    So there you have it, Julian. Care to respond, as you said you would? You didn’t respond to me before in these two instances, but you’ve just said you ‘will duly respond’ this time. Please keep to your word.

  46. To Mr Hewson and Mr Mosby,

    I have tried to reason with you both on a number of occasions in the past.

    Perfectly polite personal emails were sent to you asking you to desist.

    As for abusive phone calls to agents, I spoke with your agent Mr Hewson in a conciliatory attempt to stop your libellous vitriol, the conversation was perfectly civil, as I am confident your agent will confirm.

    An attempt by me to disrupt a Welsh book event?

    I assume you are referring to your talk in Swansea last November, I sat in the audience for about 10 minutes and left – without saying one word and heaven knows there are enough witnesses to confirm this.

    To date as readers of Uncut will be fully aware, where my reporting is concerned all you both have done is twist and corrupt a piece relating to a Welsh businessman.

    I have now written a considerable number of ‘Letters’ with a deluge of facts and data stated therein, and this is all you both have??

    I have no idea what is motivating you two gentleman, and thank God I really don’t want to know.

    Hatred diminishes only the haters.

    Neither of you are getting anywhere with whatever noble crusade you have undertaken.

    You are nether hurting nor damaging me, but you are certainly doing both to yourselves.

    Good luck,

    Julian Ruck

  47. To Steve Mosby,

    You underestimate me.

    I am more than happy to respond to your accusations of plagiarism, wasting police time, fake reviews and threats to sue – ON A PUBLIC PLATFORM.

    Name the time and place.

    It is you who hides between a screen of cowardice, not me.

    Julian Ruck

  48. Firstly this *is* a public platform — one on which you wriggle your way out of questions constantly. If you want to answer your critics you can do it here — if you could find the answers.

    Secondly… why would you phone my literary agent with a threat to sue me when you know perfectly well how to contact me directly? Answer: because you’re a shameful little bully trying to make life awkward for anyone who’s rumbled you. So you spread your bile around through spurious Freedom of Information requests (at great public expense) and attempts at puerile shit-stirring.

    Labour Uncut should be ashamed for giving you a platform. Especially now you’ve confirmed even you don’t think it’s a public one.

  49. stevemosby says:

    Julian –

    “To Steve Mosby,

    You underestimate me.

    I am more than happy to respond to your accusations of plagiarism, wasting police time, fake reviews and threats to sue – ON A PUBLIC PLATFORM.

    Name the time and place.

    It is you who hides between a screen of cowardice, not me.

    Julian Ruck”

    What counts as a “PUBLIC FORUM”? This is one. My blog is one. Rather than waste money on travel and accommodation, I’m happy to host a series of questions to you on my blog. I can post questions and you can respond in the comments, and others can chip in too. It is a relatively small blog (900 unique visitors a day, but that tends to double when I post), but I’m sure we can attract an audience. I don’t censor or delete comments, unlike you, and the results will be there to quote from.

    If you really want this, it would seem to be the way to go. If you insist on face-to-face then I’m sure we can arrange that too. But again, if you can’t do it in writing then I can’t imagine you can do it in person.

  50. Luca Veste says:

    “I tell you what, being as you are such a keen disciple of every word I write, why don’t you itemise here on Uncut, each and very piece of data, fact or financial amount etc that you in your expert opinion believe to be fantasy?

    I will duly respond, but note I will not engage with pathetic, Alinskyite and trollish desperation.” – Julian Ruck

    When you invite debate (as you do every time you submit an article here or elsewhere which is open for comments), you must expect any information used within – especially in the case of articles such as yours, which are political and debatable by nature – to be questioned. I know, it’s annoying in the extreme that you can’t just post arguments against something and not be questioned on them. It’s annoying that you can’t plagiarise other writers and not be caught. It’s annoying that you can’t self-review your own “books” on Amazon and not get caught in the act. It’s annoying that some people find it really easy to discover flaws in your arguments. Yet, if you really believe in those arguments, if you really believe you should be allowed to plagiarise and self-review, you must stand up for yourself. Not by acting petulant (although I’m aware that’s probably the easiest response!) or by name calling (we’re all surely past that point in our lives now!), but by articulately refuting points, apologising for misappropriation as and when it occurs, perhaps even listening to the other side of the debate and accepting new information which may cause an alteration to your argument (I know, I know… cognitive dissonance etc, but you could at least try!). A good journalist does that – and more – but even more importantly, a person with integrity and belief in what they wrote would at least engage with questions regarding the soundness of the arguments they had made. You strike me as someone who has the utmost regards for their own beliefs… maybe give it a try and see what happens?

    In the comments on this article alone, 52 questions have been asked and gone unanswered, Julian. Try and answer a few and you may find people wouldn’t feel the need to continue. Engage in the debate. Stand up for what you believe. If you think plagiarising a fellow writer is okay, argue the point. If you believe reviewing your own work is fine and all part of marketing, tell those who think it isn’t and question it why you believe it to be so. Most importantly, if you spend time writing an article about the arts funding occurring in Wales, laying forth arguments and such like, when those arguments are questioned, don’t lie back and complain about “trolls” or other ridiculous name calling efforts on your part, argue back. Debate. Believe in your own arguments. Otherwise, yourself and your seemingly only supporter, leave yourself open to this sort of ridicule and derision.

    Or, continue on as you have been. I’m sure Labour Uncut will allow you to carry on writing these articles (hint – they love the page views these articles receive… that’s the reason they’re still accepting them). I would just assume you had a little more integrity than to continue on this path.

    52 questions, Julian. Give it a go. You never know, you might enjoy it.

Leave a Reply